Don’t hamstring future councils

Its not that many Fort Frances residents have a bad memory; just a short one.
Less than three years ago, in September, 2005, the town council of the day did not simply appoint John Albanese—the first runner-up in the previous municipal election—to fill the seat vacated by the sudden passing of Coun. Struchan Gilson.
Rather, after a heated debate, council opted for a convoluted process in which they used a weighted vote to choose from among all the losing candidates still interested in the seat, including failed mayoral hopeful Sharon Tibbs.
Mr. Albanese was not the first choice for all the councillors, but ended up with enough overall points to capture the seat.
Now if there ever was a case where town council could be accused of subverting the will of the people in favour of choosing their preferred candidate for the vacancy, this was it.
Fast forward 24 months, when the current council was faced with a sudden vacancy. Given there was more than three years left in the term, and precisely to avoid any perception of prejudice or interference, council rightly agreed in the end to hold a byelection so the people could decide who they wanted at the table.
Unfortunately, the byelection ultimately turned out to be a referendum on the decision to hold a byelection—and council now is facing calls to pass a bylaw enshrining “succession” (i.e., approaching the runners-up from the previous election in order of their finish) as the method to fill vacancies from now on.
Its true that byelections are expensive (this past one is estimated to have cost $18,000)—and its highly likely the town would be hard-pressed to afford another one if yet another seat becomes vacant for whatever reason between now and November, 2010.
On the other hand, a “succession” bylaw (if one is even allowed under the Municipal Act) basically would handcuff this council and future ones. Since every situation is different, council needs the latitude to make a decision it sees as best at that time, whether its an appointment, a byelection, or some other course of action—not be hamstrung into just one option.
The bottom line is no one can predict future circumstances and so council would be wise to reject adopting a formal “succession” bylaw.